2020 (3) TMI 599

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']. 3. Roots for levy of penalty lie in the assessment order dated 18.03.2013 framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. 4. The returned loss of Rs. 66.92 lakhs was assessed at a profit of Rs. 12.57 lakhs after making the following disallowances: a) Addition on account of share capital Rs. 20 lakhs a) Addition on account of unsecured loss Rs. 29.50 lakhs a) Addition on account of expenses Rs. 30 lakhs 5. Assessment was challenged before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A), vide appellate order dated 18.04.2016 deleted the addition of Rs. 20 lakhs, reduced the addition of Rs. 29.50 lakhs to Rs. 12.35 lakhs and addition of Rs. 30 lakhs was reduced to Rs. 5 lakhs, which wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....before the said date which will be considered before any such order is made under section 271. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Assessing Officer [Arindam Misra] Asstt Commissioner of IT New Delhi 9. A perusal of the aforementioned notice clearly shows that the Assessing Officer did not specify under which limb of the provision he has initiated the proceedings. Moreover, the penal proceedings are separate from assessment proceedings and while initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, it is incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to demonstrate under which limb he is proposing levy of penalty. 10. On identical circumstances, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi In the case of Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd....